ArticleClinical epidemiology2018
How do patients with diabetes report their comorbidities? Comparison with administrative data.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Charlson Comorbidity Index Scores between Anesthesiologists, Patients, and Administrative Data: A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Inaccurate recognition of own comorbidities is associated with poor prognosis in elderly patients with heart failure.ESC heart failure · 2022Article
- Revealing the Common Mechanisms of Scutellarin in Angina Pectoris and Ischemic Stroke Treatment via a Network Pharmacology Approach.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2021Article
- (Dis)concordance of comorbidity data and cancer status across administrative datasets, medical charts, and self-reports.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Association of hyperlipidaemia with 5-year survival after hospitalisation for acute myocardial infarction: a propensity score matched analysis.Open heart · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPatients with diabetes are probably often unaware of their comorbidities. We estimated agreement between self-reported comorbidities and administrative data.
methodsIn a random sample of 464 diabetes patients, data from a questionnaire asking about the presence of 14 comorbidities closely related to diabetes were individually linked with statutory health insurance data.
resultsSpecificities were >97%, except cardiac insufficiency (94.5%), eye diseases (93.8%), peripheral arterial disease (92.6%), hypertension (90.9%), and peripheral neuropathy (85.8%). Sensitivities were <60%, except amputation (100%), hypertension (83.1%), and myocardial infarction (67.2%). A few positive predictive values were >90% (hypertension, myocardial infarction, and eye disease), and six were below 70%. Six negative predictive values were >90%, and two <70% (hypertension and eye disease). Total agreement was between 42.7% (eye disease) and 100% (dialysis and amputation). Overall, substantial agreement was observed for three morbidities (kappa 0.61-0.80: hypertension, myocardial infarction, and amputation). Moderate agreement (kappa 0.41-0.60) was estimated for angina pectoris, heart failure, stroke, peripheral neuropathy, and kidney disease. Factors associated with agreement were the number of comorbidities, diabetes duration, age, sex, and education.
conclusionsMyocardial infarction and amputation were well reported by patients as comorbidities; eye diseases and foot ulceration rather poorly, particularly in older, male, or less educated patients. Patient information needs improving.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.